Loading skill
Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →brycewang-stanford/cogpsych-workflow
Use when starting or navigating any Cognitive Psychology (Elsevier) manuscript and you are unsure which sub-skill applies. Use when choosing among manuscript types or returning with a decision letter. Routes by lifecycle stage and contribution type (multi-experiment empirical, experiment-plus-model, modeling-led, theoretical/review), and flags the journal's long-form, model-driven house style and code-transparency expectations. It dispatches; it does not draft content.
Passed 16 of 23 test cases with the skill, and 4 of 23 without it.
and 15 more in the full report
16 fixed0 passed either way3 still failing4 broke
Tokens, turns and time describe resource use, not a dollar price.
One of 16 test cases the skill fixed. Same model, same prompt, with and without the skill.
I am outlining an integrative theoretical review paper for Cognitive Psychology that synthesizes recent work in category learning without running new data collection. We want to know where to begin in the paper preparation pipeline. Please analyze our situation and return the routing decision specifying the Stage, Type, primary Route to skill, a one-line Why, and the Then step.
| Checked | Without skill | With skill |
|---|---|---|
| Identifies Type as Theoretical-review | Passed | Passed |
| Routes to cogpsych-literature-positioning | Missed | Passed |
The instructions your model reads when the skill loads.
The orchestrator for a Cognitive Psychology (Elsevier) submission. The journal's two defining features are that it rewards longer, integrative, model-driven papers — typically a multi-experiment program tied to a formal/computational model — and that it expects data, model code, and analysis scripts to be shareable. The router makes sure the contribution is theory-and-model-shaped from the start, then sends the user to the matching skill.
cogpsych-rebuttal)| Situation | Type | Route note |
|---|---|---|
| Several controlled experiments that jointly constrain a theory | Multi-experiment empirical | main pipeline; make each experiment add inference, not repeat |
| Experiments plus a fitted formal model (the common shape here) | Experiment + model | pull cogpsych-theory-and-hypotheses (formalize) + cogpsych-data-analysis (fit/compare) forward |
| A new model / analysis tested against existing or new data | Modeling-led | cogpsych-theory-and-hypotheses → cogpsych-data-analysis (model recovery + comparison) |
| Integrative theoretical synthesis or review with a substantive advance | Theoretical / review | cogpsych-literature-positioning + cogpsych-theory-and-hypotheses |
A single short experiment reporting one effect is usually the wrong shape for this venue — that is a Psychological Science / short-report contribution. Cognitive Psychology wants the longer arc.
Idea / fit? → cogpsych-topic-selection
Theory + model + predictions? → cogpsych-theory-and-hypotheses
Where does it sit in the field? → cogpsych-literature-positioning
Experiments / stimuli / power? → cogpsych-study-design
Analysis + model fit/comparison? → cogpsych-data-analysis
Exhibits (data + model fit)? → cogpsych-tables-figures
Long-form prose clear? → cogpsych-writing-style
Data + model code + materials open? → cogpsych-open-science-and-transparency
How will it be judged? → cogpsych-review-process
Ready to submit (Editorial Manager)? → cogpsych-submission
test cases passed, vs 4 / 23 without
Published skills whose descriptions closely match this one, with their headline benchmark lift.
More skills from the same source and nearby in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.